Hacker News Reader

Comment by cronix | Hacker News Reader

I didn't detect any rabid right-wing bias in this documentary, despite whoever owns it. It seemed pretty neutral, if not from a humanitarian perspective. I don't think I've ever seen a rabid right-wing org point out that drug addiction is actually the biggest component of this homeless problem, and showing a solution working elsewhere that was primarily based on getting people off of drugs.

> we had an attempt to tax big companies to get some money to deal with this get shouted down by all the folks in Amazon's pockets.

It sounds like people need to vote for politicians with spines then if shouting them down is all it takes, assuming the majority of people actually wanted it because they believed it would solve the problem.

View on HN

> we had an attempt to tax big companies to get some money to deal with this get shouted down by all the folks in Amazon's pockets.

> assuming the majority of people actually wanted it because they believed it would solve the problem.

The poster is omitting that most people in Seattle were opposed to the tax, because it would have significantly harmed labor unions and regional businesses, like grocery stores.

The Seattle city council crafted a tax without consulting businesses about how economics works, doubled down and told people to stuff it when they pointed out that it was going to damage the local economy by crippling mid-tier businesses that had high-gross, low-margin revenues, and were then forced into an embarrassing retreat when labor unions started campaigning against it and neighborhood organizations circled the wagons to protect their historic businesses.

It was also a pocket change, feel good tax: Seattle spends over a billion dollars a year on poverty, between low-income subsidies and homelessness, and has nothing but a degrading situation to show for it.

People in Seattle just have a simple question: both Amazon and the SCC have spent about $25B over the past decade -- Amazon to rebuild SLU, and the SCC on anti-poverty; why does Amazon have a campus and tens to hundreds of thousands of lives changed, while the SCC has literal poop on the streets to show for it?

I live in Seattle, and work for Big Tech. Your description is basically spot on. It's frustrating to me because the Seattle City Council seems so disconnected from the strife that a lot of these people face - as correctly depicted in the KOMO documentary. If the SCC wanted to extract some value from Amazon then fine, just do it explicitly. This was a half-handed way to go about it, and so disconnected from how local economies work.

I will live here for a few more years for sure. But if the SCC keeps on this same path, and Seattle turns into SF I'm leaving. It's sad, because I've been living here off and on since 2011 and I genuinely love the PNW, since it's got everything I want - access to nature and the water, smart people that I'd consider starting a company with, and a beautiful aesthetic. I'm not the only one that feels this way. Coworkers, especially those who just had kids or are about to, plan on leaving for the suburbs or ditching the city altogether.

Edit: was googling city council videos and, well, here's an example of what I mean:

https://youtu.be/gMrBFNoHBkg

Reply on news.ycombinator.com